Who wants a new one ?

[PaulStewart]

What year would that have been Paul? I was trying to remember when I bought mine from Rush Hifi in Romford, I recall it was around the £300 mark.

Rush Hi Fi that's a name from the past, good dealers as I recall. It would have been 78 or 79 I think, I left to set up and run the recording studio at the Rainbow in '80.

[Marco]

Hi Shaun,

Upgrading of a turntable by the manufacturer through a naturally progressive path is completely normal. Buying a shedload of random bits and fitting them is not.

Sure, except that the "random bits" in question, offered by the likes of Mike New, Paul Hynes, Funk and others, are far from being random, but rather are the culmination of many months (in some cases years) of research and development by experienced professionals, who not only are experts in their own field of electronics or engineering, but fundamentally understand how to implement their products successfully into the design of the Technics SL-1200/1210.

If these guys were simply inexperienced 'bodgers/fly-by-nights' then you'd have a valid point, but that's not the case. Furthermore, look at it this way: do the "random bits" supplied by the many respected manufacturers who offer aftermarket modifications for the LP12 (Inspire, Funk, not to mention those from Audioflat, and many more besides) result in the LP12, when fitted with them, automatically becoming an inferior product, compared with the same turntable upgraded through a "naturally progressive path" by Linn?

Or does, say, an OL-modified Rega RB300 or Tecnoarm automatically suffer from the introduction of "random bits" provided by Origin Live and Michell, respectively, and somehow make it 'incorrect' or inferior, compared with the original item?

The answer of course is no. Much would depend on subjective opinion, after the user has listened to the alternatives and formed a conclusion on the matter - and so it is with the numerous aftermarket modifications available for the Technics. However, the key point here is that the Technics is not a 'special case' when it comes to non-manufacturer approved modifications being applied to its design, therefore it is not any more 'pointless' subjecting an SL-1200/1210 to such modifications than doing the same to a Linn or Rega turntable.

I really do hope that this fact will now finally penetrate the minds of the masses!

Buying bits and pieces and fitting them to your own deck is totally different and results in that deck not resembling the original item any longer.

It depends on what you mean by "resembling"? Aesthetically, I'd say that most modified Technics T/Ts essentially still look like Technics T/Ts. Underneath the hood may be a different story, but at the end of the day, what does it matter? Surely the only thing that's important is how it sounds, not that you have an entirely original turntable and/or one whose performance evolution has been derived through following a path stipulated by the manufacturer?

I'm afraid when people worry about that sort of stuff it makes me question their ability to think for themselves, make their own decisions, and trust their ears, as opposed to being spoon-fed an 'official' upgrade path by a commercial manufacturer, which often locks the user into a very expensive and ultimately fruitless journey of 'box-swapping'.

At least with the Technics, no one single manufacturer has the monopoly on providing what is considered as the 'correct' or 'ultimate' upgrade path, which forces Technics users to think for themselves, apply some lateral thinking, and thus escape from being inside a self-imposed comfort zone!

I think the problem is, Shaun (and there's no shame or harm in this), you're just someone who prefers a 'ready-made solution', provided by a specific manufacturer, (the 'safe' choice, as it were) instead of pushing the boundaries and seeing just how much 'bang you can get for your buck' by maximising the full potential of a given design. As they say, each to his or her own - both approaches are valid

Marco.

[Marco]

The chief requirements of a turntable motor unit are that it is well built, speed stable and has good immunity from vibration. An SL1200 is pretty good, even on an absolute scale, in those regards.

Agreed. However, that doesn't necessarily mean you'll like the sound of it...

I appreciate it is easy to get a different impression from various postings but the mods bring tiny incremental improvements, not night and day changes.

On that, I strongly disagree (you wouldn't know as you haven't applied any major modifications to your T/T), although I suppose it depends on what is meant by "night and day changes". I guess that sort of difference would realistically only occur with a major speaker upgrade or when moving to a new house, and thus putting your system into a totally different room.

However, if we replace the hyperbole and the description of improvements as being "night and day" with, say, 'fundamentally significant and highly effective', then that is most certainly an accurate description of what happens when one fits the likes of a Mike New bearing or Paul Hynes PSU to a Technics SL-1200/1210.

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Shaun,

Sure, except that the "random bits" in question, offered by the likes of Mike New, Paul Hynes, Funk and others, are far from being random, but rather are the culmination of many months (in some cases years) of research and development by experienced professionals, who not only are experts in their own field of electronics or engineering, but fundamentally understand how to implement their products successfully into the design of the Technics SL-1200/1210.

If these guys were simply inexperienced 'bodgers/fly-by-nights' then you'd have a valid point, but that's not the case. Furthermore, look at it this way: do the "random bits" supplied by the many respected manufacturers who offer aftermarket modifications for the LP12 (Inspire, Funk, not to mention those from Audioflat, and many more besides) result in the LP12, when fitted with them, automatically becoming an inferior product, compared with the same turntable upgraded through a "naturally progressive path" by Linn?

Or does, say, an OL-modified Rega RB300 or Tecnoarm automatically suffer from the introduction of "random bits" provided by Origin Live and Michell, respectively, and somehow make it 'incorrect' or inferior, compared with the original item?

The answer of course is no. Much would depend on subjective opinion, after the user has listened to the alternatives and formed a conclusion on the matter - and so it is with the numerous aftermarket modifications available for the Technics. However, the key point here is that the Technics is not a 'special case' when it comes to non-manufacturer approved modifications being applied to its design, therefore it is not any more 'pointless' subjecting an SL-1200/1210 to such modifications than doing the same to a Linn or Rega turntable.

I really do hope that this fact will now finally penetrate the minds of the masses!



It depends on what you mean by "resembling"? Aesthetically, I'd say that most modified Technics T/Ts essentially still look like Technics T/Ts. Underneath the hood may be a different story, but at the end of the day, what does it matter? Surely the only thing that's important is how it sounds, not that you have an entirely original turntable and/or one whose performance evolution has been derived through following a path stipulated by the manufacturer?

I'm afraid when people worry about that sort of stuff it makes me question their ability to think for themselves, make their own decisions, and trust their ears, as opposed to being spoon-fed an 'official' upgrade path by a commercial manufacturer, which often locks the user into a very expensive and ultimately fruitless journey of 'box-swapping'.

At least with the Technics, no one single manufacturer has the monopoly on providing what is considered as the 'correct' or 'ultimate' upgrade path, which forces Technics users to think for themselves, apply some lateral thinking, and thus escape from being inside a self-imposed comfort zone!

I think the problem is, Shaun (and there's no shame or harm in this), you're just someone who prefers a 'ready-made solution', provided by a specific manufacturer, (the 'safe' choice, as it were) instead of pushing the boundaries and seeing just how much 'bang you can get for your buck' by maximising the full potential of a given design. As they say, each to his or her own - both approaches are valid

Marco.

I'm rather surprised that there has been no response to this

I presume we all agree, then?

Marco.

[Clive197]

I'm rather surprised that there has been no response to this

I presume we all agree, then?

Marco.

Can't speak for anybody else, but I agree with you.

[Oldpinkman]

The chief requirements of a turntable motor unit are that it is well built, speed stable and has good immunity from vibration. An SL1200 is pretty good, even on an absolute scale, in those regards. I appreciate it is easy to get a different impression from various postings but the mods bring tiny incremental improvements, not night and day changes.

I think this is reasonable, although as I think Marco has subsequently commented, it depends on your hyperbole scale. You have of course described the motor unit. And I for one would agree that the biggest change to the record player is to sort the arm out. Having listened to 2 other arms on the deck, the standard arm, and a funked standard arm, the 2 "non-standards" were clearly identifiable, possessing their own distinct characteristics. The funked Technics was a disappointment, and "family of" the standard arm. Thereafter, changes to the motor unit will have less obvious effects - the benefits of which are perhaps only apparent when everything else is sorted and you can chase down those subtleties. Mat very obvious, and decent bang for buck. Platter is fairly obvious - both funks (the only 2 non-standards I have heard) being quite obviously different from the standard, but serious money (like why not save it and buy a different TT!). I'm guessing now, but the bearing is not going to make a huge difference to sound (unless the standard was worn) but the MN will allow his heavyweight early platters to be used. The new funk will be stable and hard - so good at transmitting energy away from the platter. If I were keeping one rather than having it as a hostage while my PT was fixed, or doing AK a favour and giving him a 2nd opinion on his mods, my feeling is I would look to isolation next.

But my main point is your comments relate to the motor unit, and this bears out my little obsession that, whilst far from irrelevant, the motor unit makes a less obvious contribution to the record player sound than the arm.

[Marco]

I'm guessing now...

Indeed, and unfortunately, it shows....

...but the bearing is not going to make a huge difference to sound (unless the standard was worn)

Not so (and I'm speaking from practical experience, not guessing), upgrading from the stock Technics bearing to the MN one produces significant improvements, in terms of overall noise reduction, and therefore music is reproduced in a much more believable and lifelike way. Trust me, the effect is not subtle!

These improvements occur simply because the stock Technics bearing, whilst decent, was built to a price. Mike's, on the other hand wasn't, and has been engineered to a much higher standard, improving mechanical integrity along the way, resulting in a far superior item, all round. You only have to hold an MN bearing and a stock Technics one in your hand to appreciate that they are two very different animals!

The bearings I've seen on some £10k turntables aren't as well made as Mike's...

But my main point is your comments relate to the motor unit, and this bears out my little obsession that, whilst far from irrelevant, the motor unit makes a less obvious contribution to the record player sound than the arm.

Sorry, Richard, I totally disagree. The superb (highly accurate) Quartz-controlled D/D motor unit is the whole raison d'être behind modifying the Technics - a motor unit that would cost many thousands of pounds to produce today. Without that, modifying the Technics, in the way many of us do here, would be a complete waste of time. It is because the motor unit is *so* good, that transforming the Techy into a genuinely world class T/T is possible.

No tonearm in the world could exert a similar influence.

Marco.

[Oldpinkman]

It is because the motor unit is *so* good, that transforming the Techy into a genuinely world class T/T is possible.

No tonearm in the world could exert a similar influence.

Marco.

Not guessing now. Direct experience. If you take an SL1200, a Pink Triangle, a Funk LSD and a Funk Saphire, and you put on them a Funk FXR and Funk F5 - you can hear the arm on each turntable. Whilst the record players sound different for changing the motor unit, (an in particular in that set, the stock Technics is quite poor) the character of the arm is evident across the range. I guess this all comes back to balance and system matching but the arms character is very evident. Perhaps it just reflects my recent experience - when you look around most people try different arms on a turntable. I have been (not deliberately) trying different turntables under the same arm!

It wasn't meant to knock the Technics Direct Drive, which is a perfectly competent motor. Perhaps you misinterpreted my use of "motor unit". Harking back to HiFi Choice reviews I meant the turntable bit of a record player rather than the arm bit of a record player. I didn't mean the motor, like the adored DD on the SL1200 or the premotec I am fitting to my PT. I meant the bit of the record player that isn't the arm or the cartridge. "Turntable" is often confused with "whole record player" - perhaps not so much on this forum, but in general usage. In that context, you have changed most of the "motor unit" just keeping the motor. But whilst platters, bearings, feet, plinths, lids etc all affect the sound somewhat, it is , as Martin suggested, relatively subtle at each stage

And the motor, the beloved SL1200 DD is good - but it only spins the record at the right speed! And there has been a fair bit of recent confusion about whether it can do that at anything other than the finest balance of mass/inertia. Opinions varying erratically over time from the same users.

[Macca]

yes I was using motor unit in it's accepted sense rather than referring to the actual, DD quartz locked motor. Apologies for any confusion.

Also would like to point out that if the deck is susceptible to vibration and has significant speed variation then you would be wasting your time trying different arms on it, no matter how good they were.